Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

agentView

by de.agentview
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Delete Display

delete_display
Destructive

Permanently deletes a display and all its associated content. This action cannot be undone. Use this only when the user explicitly confirms they want to remove the display. Requires admin scope. Returns id, name and deleted (boolean true).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "display_id": "<display_id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_display"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
display_idYesThe 8-character alphanumeric display profile ID to delete, e.g. 'ABCD1234'.
access_tokenNoOptional bearer token; prefer session_request_id.
session_request_idNoSession handle from create_auth_session; pass it on every authenticated call.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNo
nameNo
deletedNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "deleted": {
+      "type": [
+        "boolean",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "id": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "name": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / session_request_id
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Session handle from create_auth_session; pass it on every authenticated call.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / access_token / description
      Previous value: -"Optional bearer credential. Prefer passing session_request_id (from create_auth_session) instead; every tool accepts it and the server resolves it to your identity server-side. Use access_token only when you hold an OAuth bearer token and your MCP client cannot send it as an Authorization: Bearer HTTP header automatically."New value: +"Optional bearer token; prefer session_request_id."
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "properties": {
-    "deleted": {
-      "type": [
-        "boolean",
-        "null"
-      ]
-    },
-    "id": {
-      "type": [
-        "string",
-        "null"
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  4. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedOutput schema / properties / deleted / type
      Previous value: -"boolean"New value: +[
+  "boolean",
+  "null"
+]
    • changedOutput schema / properties / id / type
      Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
  5. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / access_token / description
      Previous value: -"Optional JWT access token for authentication. Pass the token returned by get_auth_session when your MCP client does not send it as an Authorization: Bearer HTTP header automatically."New value: +"Optional bearer credential. Prefer passing session_request_id (from create_auth_session) instead; every tool accepts it and the server resolves it to your identity server-side. Use access_token only when you hold an OAuth bearer token and your MCP client cannot send it as an Authorization: Bearer HTTP header automatically."
  6. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / access_token / default
      Removed value: -null
    • changedInput schema / properties / access_token / type
      Previous value: -[
-  "string",
-  "null"
-]New value: +"string"
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "deleted": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "id": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  7. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, but the description adds critical context: permanence ('cannot be undone'), cascading deletion ('all its associated content'), admin scope requirement, and the return shape. This goes beyond what annotations alone communicate, with no contradiction.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three concise sentences front-load the most critical information: permanence, irreversibility, and the explicit confirmation requirement. Every sentence contributes value with no redundancy or filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a destructive mutation, the description covers the essential operational details: irreversibility, cascading content deletion, admin auth requirement, user confirmation gate, and return values. Combined with the rich input schema and output schema, nothing necessary for correct invocation is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 100% coverage, with detailed descriptions for display_id, access_token, and session_request_id. The tool description adds no parameter-specific meaning, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb and resource: 'Permanently deletes a display and all its associated content.' It clearly identifies the action and scope. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like clear_display or remove_display_from_org, so it falls short of a 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides clear usage context: 'Use this only when the user explicitly confirms they want to remove the display,' plus the admin scope requirement. It does not enumerate alternatives or explicitly state when not to use it, but the confirmation gate is strong enough guidance for a destructive action.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All agentView toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources